sábado, octubre 31, 2015
Genetic engineering is not the same
viernes, octubre 30, 2015
From GM Watch: New GM techniques give rise to GMOs, say reports
The first report, a legal analysis commissioned by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), says genome editing techniques are indeed genetic engineering and give rise to GMOs.
The report says that these techniques, far from being precise and predictable as GMO proponents claim, “bear significant risk potentials”. The report adds that their effects are “foreseeable only to some degree due to the novelty of the procedures and the lack of relevant studies”.
The second report is by Friends of the Earth France, the French National Federation of Organic Agriculture, Confédération Paysanne, the Peasant Seeds Network, and members of the High Council of Biotechnology in France.
The new techniques covered are:
* Oligodirected mutagenesis
* Site directed Nucleases (SDN): zinc finger nucleases (also Talen/CrisprCas9/meganucleases)
* RNA dependent DNA methylation
* Reverse breeding
* Synthetic biology.
The report concludes that all the listed techniques give rise to GMOs which fall under the scope of the EU’s GMO regulations. That also means they should be labelled as GM.
Report in English: http://www.semencespaysannes.org/legal_status_of_products_derived_from_new_tec_12-actu_281.php
Report in French: http://www.semencespaysannes.org/statut_juridique_produits_issus_nouvelles_tec_12-actu_280.php
Seralini wins whistleblower award
Prof Séralini will receive the award in recognition of his research demonstrating the toxic effects of Roundup herbicide on rats when administered at a low environmentally relevant dose over a long-term period. After the research was published, Prof Séralini was attacked in what the VDW and IALANA call “a vehement campaign by ‘interested circles’ from the chemical industry” as well as from the UK Science Media Centre. This smear campaign led to the retraction of his team’s paper by the first journal that published it. But Prof Séralini and his team fought back, countering the scientific arguments raised against their research and republishing their paper in another journal.
While Prof Séralini’s study was not a carcinogenicity study but a long-term toxicity study, the carcinogenic potential of Roundup was confirmed this year when the World Health Organisation’s cancer agency IARC published its verdict that glyphosate herbicides are “probable” human carcinogens.
VDW and IALANA said that Prof Séralini’s unwavering refusal to abandon his professional ethics since the publication of his paper “gained him the worldwide support of many scientists who defended the methods he chose and deemed his research results to represent genuine scientific progress”. They added, “He greatly furthered the scientific debate on the health risks of the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup. He revealed systemic weaknesses in the accreditation process for herbicides in particular and pesticides in general. So once again it can clearly be seen that the preservation of our health depends on whistleblowers.”
Prof Séralini will share the Whistleblower Award jointly with the former US drone pilot Brandon Bryant. Bryant quit active service with the US armed forces in 2011 due to his rejection of the secret worldwide drone war carried out by the US. He particularly objected to the innumerable civilian victims and the severe psychological consequences for the drone pilots involved in the killings.
The awards will be presented on Friday, 16 October 2015, at 7.30pm, in the Bürgersaal of Karlsruhe City Hall in the presence of the Mayor, Dr Frank Mentrup.
Read this article online here: http://www.gmwatch.org/news/
miércoles, octubre 28, 2015
Buckraking on the Food Beat: When Is It a Conflict of Interest?, by Stacky Malkan
Commentary from a US colleague:
Another excellent story from US RTK on the Washington Post's Tamar Haspel taking money from biotech interests, but failing to reveal how much, all the while repeating industry talking points in her columns. Hassle maintains she'll only attend/arrange meetings if there are a range of views (not all pro-industry) on GE represented. However, the fact that she was a "faculty member" at a Biotechnology Literacy Project Conference, that was organized by Jon Entine and Cami Ryan (who now works for Monsanto) and funded by Genetic Literacy Project and Academic Reviews (both ag chem front groups) and Univ. of Florida, which has received tens of millions of dollars from biotech and big food companies.
Crisis del concepto de gen y alimentos transgénicos
miércoles, octubre 21, 2015
Doug Gurian-Sherman's part two of a two part series on the influence of money in agricultural research.
lunes, octubre 19, 2015
Surprise - Cornell is taking the GMO safety debate to a new level!
Brasil ataca la moratoria internacional sobre semillas Terminator
sábado, octubre 17, 2015
Dirty money, dirty science
Food Tank, 22 September 2015
The biotech industry’s web of attempts to buy credibility, by laundering its messages through supposedly independent academic scientists, is unraveling and beginning to reveal the influence of huge amount of industry money on the independence of academic agricultural science. Some of this process was revealed recently in The New York Times. Many of these efforts to influence policy or public opinion start with industry staff emails, including suggested topics, points, and themes, which are then laundered through the credibility of academic scientists. It is a matter of academic scientists promoting positions and arguments of the industry, not merely a sharing of positions that each party already held and were acting on.
martes, octubre 13, 2015
lunes, octubre 12, 2015
México: Nosotros somos los "antagónicos"
sábado, octubre 10, 2015
El imperio de Monsanto en Puerto Rico y la resistencia popular, por Eliván Martínez
Big Industry’s All Out Assault on Democracy and Your Right to Know
How an agrichemical industry mouthpiece is trying to undermine GMO labeling with bogus legal analysis
viernes, octubre 09, 2015
Mitos y verdades sobre los alimentos modificados genéticamente
El 23 de julio del presente año, la Cámara de Representantes de Estados Unidos aprobó la ley HR 1599 curiosamente nombrada: “The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act”. Esta ley, conocida entre el público como la ley DARK, “Deny Americans the Right to Know”, aunque habla de seguridad y etiquetado en su nombre, irónicamente lo que busca precisamente es prohibir en los estados toda iniciativa a favor de la rotulación de los productos que sean producidos o que contengan alimentos modificados genéticamente, conocidos también por sus siglas en inglés como “GMO”. De acuerdo a Enviromental Working Group (EWG), las compañías de alimentos y biotecnología gastaron $63.6 millones en el 2014 para presionar y lograr la aprobación de este tipo de legislación anti etiquetado, tres veces más que el año anterior. En el 2013 invirtieron alrededor de $25.4 millones, y de esos, $13.3 millones fueron aportados por las empresas Coca Cola y Pepsi Co. De aprobarse esta ley, Puerto Rico también se vería afectado. Proyectos legislativos como el 524 de la senadora María De Lourdes Santiago, que busca el etiquetado de los productos con ingredientes transgénicos, y el del representante Ricardo Llerandi Cruz, serían igualmente detenidos.
lunes, octubre 05, 2015
From GM Watch: How “the Biofortified boys” defended the pesticide industry’s secrets in Hawaii
Reasonable demands, you might think – but the pesticide industry disagreed. It launched a massive PR and lobbying exercise to defeat the bill, as revealed by a recent New York Times’ investigation. The industry’s chosen mouthpieces for the Hawaii project were the pro-GMO scientist Kevin Folta and a group of other supposedly independent scientists, who travelled to Kauai to testify against the bill in Kauai County Council hearings.